Just make the women's game best of 5 sets and end this pointless debate. I agree, though, while they're playing best of 3 sets, women should not be paid the same as men in grand slams. So, make it best of 5 sets and everyone will be happy.

The women have made it clear they are happy to play best of 5 at the slams, too.

Heard through the grapevine that the ATP actually is against the idea - as they'll lose their % of TV and court time and are afraid of losing fans to WTA (In period where Federer, Murray and Nadal's stars are fading - Bouchard, Stephens, Robson rising).

I don't necessarily agree with the names used, but they were the names given to me.

Just make the women's game best of 5 sets and end this pointless debate. I agree, though, while they're playing best of 3 sets, women should not be paid the same as men in grand slams. So, make it best of 5 sets and everyone will be happy.

Just make the women's game best of 5 sets and end this pointless debate. I agree, though, while they're playing best of 3 sets, women should not be paid the same as men in grand slams. So, make it best of 5 sets and everyone will be happy.

This is a situation where most tennis fans do not agree with the artificial "equal" prize money (NOTHING EQUAL ABOUT IT WHATSOEVER), yet political correctness has taken hold of the decision makers at the 4 Grand Slams.

What are our options? Really, the only thing we can do is to BOYCOTT THE SLAMS...including the mens' events. Hit the organizers where it counts. Make a point of saying, I will not contribute a dime to this outrageous scheme of funding women's tennis artificially through support for mens tennis!

That, IMO, would be the best option. Not only it would make equal pay fair but it would also remove mugs from high ranking who have no fitness. Disgusting to see clearly overweight players succeeding only because they need to play best of 3

I say give them the same prize money and let them play Best of 5. Or let them play Best of 3 and reduce the paycheck accordingly.

That, IMO, would be the best option. Not only it would make equal pay fair but it would also remove mugs from high ranking who have no fitness. Disgusting to see clearly overweight players succeeding only because they need to play best of 3

If Sharapova at Wimbledon wins the first two sets 6-4, 6-4 in 1h20min, she goes home and receives for this work £23,125 (2012 numbers)
Now if Nadal at Wimbledon wins the first two sets 6-4, 6-4 in 1h20min, he must continue to play x amount of time to receive exactly the same £23,125 (2012 numbers).

I know that at my work place I would feel discriminated if all the women who do the same job as I would leave work at 3pm and I have to stay until 5pm, yet we'd be paid the same.

I say give them the same prize money and let them play Best of 5. Or let them play Best of 3 and reduce the paycheck accordingly.

He's also got a lot of other videos absolutely annihilating feminism, if you're interested

This video is only focusing on biasness. What about 2012 US Open Djokovic beating Lorenzi 6-1, 6-0, 6-1 20 games while Cibulkova beats Larsson 6-7, 6-2, 6-0 27 games, do does that mean Djokovic should receive less. How about Federer receiving a walkover to the quarters, so he shouldn't receive any money. The issue of equal prize money rose when Women was actually above than Men, and Men was being paid more. And men outside slams are generally being paid more when you match each tournament category. How about Nadal getting paid more than Sharapova at Rome 2012 when Nadal has played 95 games and Sharapova has played 117 games.

This thread has more than 15 replies.
Click here to review the whole thread.